Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

Every shot, every lead change, every rotation — visualized.

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
PHI lead GSW lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
GSW 2P — 3P —
PHI 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 174 attempts

GSW GSW Shot-making Δ

Hield 6/12 +0.2
Kuminga 4/12 -3.7
Melton 5/11 -1.0
Moody 5/10 +0.4
Spencer 5/8 +3.0
Post 4/8 +1.3
Horford Hard 1/8 -4.9
Podziemski 2/8 -5.1
Santos 2/4 -0.6
Green Hard 1/3 +0.3

PHI PHI Shot-making Δ

Maxey Hard 13/27 +3.4
Embiid Hard 5/13 -1.7
Grimes 5/13 -5.1
Edgecombe Hard 4/8 +1.7
Edwards Hard 3/6 +2.4
McCain Hard 3/6 +0.7
Barlow Open 3/6 -1.6
Walker Hard 2/3 +1.8
Bona Open 1/2 -0.8
Drummond Hard 0/1 -1.1
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
GSW
PHI
37/89 Field Goals 39/85
41.6% Field Goal % 45.9%
12/42 3-Pointers 10/37
28.6% 3-Point % 27.0%
12/16 Free Throws 11/14
75.0% Free Throw % 78.6%
51.0% True Shooting % 54.3%
51 Total Rebounds 56
11 Offensive 11
32 Defensive 36
27 Assists 23
2.08 Assist/TO Ratio 1.21
13 Turnovers 19
12 Steals 8
4 Blocks 7
20 Fouls 14
44 Points in Paint 44
8 Fast Break Pts 17
24 Points off TOs 25
16 Second Chance Pts 15
67 Bench Points 24
4 Largest Lead 24
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Tyrese Maxey
35 PTS · 3 REB · 2 AST · 39.7 MIN
+23.53
2
Buddy Hield
14 PTS · 8 REB · 2 AST · 25.5 MIN
+18.6
3
Dominick Barlow
6 PTS · 14 REB · 3 AST · 35.4 MIN
+16.38
4
Pat Spencer
16 PTS · 4 REB · 4 AST · 24.0 MIN
+15.37
5
De'Anthony Melton
14 PTS · 1 REB · 3 AST · 21.1 MIN
+12.22
6
Moses Moody
14 PTS · 2 REB · 2 AST · 23.2 MIN
+11.22
7
Quentin Grimes
12 PTS · 5 REB · 6 AST · 38.0 MIN
+9.56
8
Quinten Post
10 PTS · 3 REB · 4 AST · 25.5 MIN
+8.3
9
Justin Edwards
8 PTS · 3 REB · 1 AST · 21.8 MIN
+7.37
10
VJ Edgecombe
10 PTS · 6 REB · 5 AST · 23.8 MIN
+6.01
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:00 TEAM offensive REBOUND 98–99
Q4 0:00 T. Maxey BLOCK (1 BLK) 98–99
Q4 0:00 MISS D. Melton 6' driving Layup - blocked 98–99
Q4 0:00 V. Edgecombe 6' tip Layup (10 PTS) 98–99
Q4 0:02 V. Edgecombe REBOUND (Off:1 Def:5) 98–97
Q4 0:02 D. Melton BLOCK (1 BLK) 98–97
Q4 0:02 MISS T. Maxey 16' fadeaway Shot - blocked 98–97
Q4 0:08 V. Edgecombe STEAL (3 STL) 98–97
Q4 0:08 P. Spencer bad pass TURNOVER (2 TO) 98–97
Q4 0:11 Q. Grimes take personal FOUL (2 PF) 98–97
Q4 0:14 TEAM offensive REBOUND 98–97
Q4 0:14 MISS D. Melton driving Layup 98–97
Q4 0:36 D. Melton STEAL (2 STL) 98–97
Q4 0:36 V. Edgecombe lost ball TURNOVER (5 TO) 98–97
Q4 0:40 D. Barlow REBOUND (Off:5 Def:9) 98–97

GAME ANALYSIS

KEEP READING

Create a free account and follow your team to get the full analysis every morning.

Create Free Account

Already have an account? Log in

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

PHI Philadelphia 76ers
S Tyrese Maxey 39.7m
35
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
+28.0

Sliced through defensive coverages with relentless downhill attacks, creating a massive surge in scoring efficiency. His two-way stamina was the defining trait of the night, as he paired his offensive explosion with highly disruptive perimeter defense (+5.6 Def) over nearly 40 minutes.

Shooting
FG 13/27 (48.1%)
3PT 4/10 (40.0%)
FT 5/5 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 59.9%
USG% 33.7%
Net Rtg +9.8
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 39.7m
Scoring +25.0
Creation +1.5
Shot Making +7.8
Hustle +0.9
Defense +4.6
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 27.3%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 3
S Quentin Grimes 38.0m
12
pts
5
reb
6
ast
Impact
+7.0

Empty perimeter possessions severely damaged his offensive efficiency and allowed defenders to sag into the paint. A complete absence of loose-ball recoveries or secondary effort (+0.0 Hustle) over 38 minutes dragged his overall impact deeply into the red despite decent passing.

Shooting
FG 5/13 (38.5%)
3PT 0/5 (0.0%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 41.9%
USG% 16.9%
Net Rtg +6.6
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.0m
Scoring +4.8
Creation +2.9
Shot Making +1.8
Hustle +6.3
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Dominick Barlow 35.5m
6
pts
14
reb
3
ast
Impact
+10.8

Anchored the interior with phenomenal rim protection and switchability (+9.3 Def) that consistently disrupted opponent drives. His relentless activity on the glass and loose balls (+4.5 Hustle) perfectly complemented his reliable, low-usage offensive role.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 8.3%
Net Rtg +2.8
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.5m
Scoring +3.5
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +13.9
Defense +2.3
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 52.9%
STL 1
BLK 3
TO 1
S Joel Embiid 25.2m
12
pts
6
reb
3
ast
Impact
-4.7

Settling for outside jumpers completely neutralized his typical dominant interior gravity and cratered his scoring output. Even though he remained a formidable deterrent in the paint (+5.1 Def), the inefficient offensive possessions crippled his overall net impact.

Shooting
FG 5/13 (38.5%)
3PT 0/5 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 43.2%
USG% 29.8%
Net Rtg +9.0
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.2m
Scoring +6.3
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +1.8
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 27.8%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 3
S VJ Edgecombe 23.9m
10
pts
6
reb
5
ast
Impact
-3.3

A dip in scoring volume and efficiency limited his usual offensive punch, forcing him to find other ways to contribute. He leaned heavily into point-of-attack disruption (+6.0 Def), but it wasn't quite enough to overcome the stalled offensive possessions during his shifts.

Shooting
FG 4/8 (50.0%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 62.5%
USG% 23.2%
Net Rtg +2.0
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.9m
Scoring +6.9
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +2.8
Defense +2.1
Turnovers -11.8
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 5
8
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+1.2

Flashed improved offensive decision-making to bump his scoring above his recent baseline. Despite showing excellent defensive instincts (+4.4 Def) on the wing, a lack of rebounding and loose-ball recoveries (+0.8 Hustle) prevented him from achieving a positive net rating.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 14.0%
Net Rtg -8.8
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.8m
Scoring +5.8
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +2.4
Hustle +0.9
Defense +2.6
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
Jared McCain 21.1m
7
pts
1
reb
3
ast
Impact
-9.3

Struggled to find the range from beyond the arc, which neutralized his primary offensive weapon and clogged spacing. Poor defensive positioning (-0.1 Def) made him a target on switches, leading to a severely negative overall footprint despite decent secondary effort.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 58.3%
USG% 17.6%
Net Rtg -4.5
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.1m
Scoring +4.7
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +0.3
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
0
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-6.7

Failed to generate any interior pressure, completely disappearing from the offensive stat sheet. While he held his ground defensively in the paint (+3.0 Def), the lack of offensive rebounding and finishing made his stint a net negative.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 2.7%
Net Rtg +11.8
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.6m
Scoring -0.8
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +1.6
Defense +0.5
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
7
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
-5.4

Provided a brief spark of scoring efficiency by capitalizing on quick cuts to the basket. However, his limited minutes and inability to generate significant defensive stops (+1.3 Def) kept his overall impact slightly below the break-even point.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 90.2%
USG% 19.4%
Net Rtg -22.4
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.3m
Scoring +6.2
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +1.5
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -3.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
Adem Bona 6.0m
2
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-5.2

Made the most of a very short rotational stint by playing within his limits and avoiding costly mistakes. His physical presence provided just enough defensive resistance (+1.7 Def) to keep his brief minutes in the positive.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 34.7%
USG% 17.6%
Net Rtg -16.7
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 6.0m
Scoring +0.3
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +2.5
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
GSW Golden State Warriors
S Moses Moody 23.2m
14
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
+7.6

A sharp regression in scoring volume from his previous outburst limited his ceiling, though his shot selection remained solid. Consistent secondary effort (+2.7 Hustle) and timely cuts helped stabilize his value, ensuring his floor minutes remained a net positive for the rotation.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 64.3%
USG% 22.6%
Net Rtg +1.9
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.2m
Scoring +9.9
Creation +1.4
Shot Making +3.0
Hustle +1.6
Defense +1.8
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Will Richard 20.4m
5
pts
0
reb
2
ast
Impact
-4.9

Maintained his recent efficiency with perfect shot selection, but a low usage rate capped his offensive ceiling. Strong defensive rotations (+5.3 Def) kept him in the black, though his overall footprint was minimal during his 20 minutes on the floor.

Shooting
FG 2/2 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 125.0%
USG% 8.2%
Net Rtg +21.0
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.4m
Scoring +5.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.2
Hustle +0.0
Defense +2.9
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 2
6
pts
6
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.8

A brutal perimeter shooting slump cratered his offensive value, snapping a hot streak of highly efficient scoring. He attempted to compensate with relentless on-ball pressure (+4.1 Def), but the empty possessions from beyond the arc ultimately sank his net impact.

Shooting
FG 2/8 (25.0%)
3PT 0/5 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 33.8%
USG% 24.0%
Net Rtg -49.3
+/- -20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.7m
Scoring +1.3
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +7.6
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
S Al Horford 17.9m
3
pts
6
reb
4
ast
Impact
-3.8

Bricklaying from the perimeter severely hampered his offensive gravity and dragged down his baseline value. However, elite rim protection and defensive positioning (+7.9 Def) entirely salvaged his night, keeping his overall impact slightly positive despite the shooting slump.

Shooting
FG 1/8 (12.5%)
3PT 1/7 (14.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 18.8%
USG% 17.8%
Net Rtg +10.0
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.9m
Scoring -2.6
Creation +1.0
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +1.8
Defense +2.9
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 16.7%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
3
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-6.5

An unusually brief and disjointed stint disrupted his rhythm, leading to a sharp drop-off from his recent scoring averages. While he still provided positive resistance in the paint (+2.1 Def), his inability to generate offensive flow dragged his overall impact into the negative.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 18.2%
Net Rtg -47.4
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.4m
Scoring +1.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.9
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
Buddy Hield 25.5m
14
pts
8
reb
2
ast
Impact
+17.0

Completely flipped the script from a brutal five-game slump by finding clean release valves in transition. His massive overall rating was driven by elite secondary effort (+5.2 Hustle) and surprisingly disruptive passing lane defense (+7.2 Def) that fueled fast-break opportunities.

Shooting
FG 6/12 (50.0%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 58.3%
USG% 18.8%
Net Rtg -7.7
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.5m
Scoring +9.2
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +3.3
Hustle +9.2
Defense +2.8
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 38.9%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 0
Quinten Post 25.5m
10
pts
3
reb
4
ast
Impact
+1.4

Capitalized on defensive mismatches in the post to boost his scoring efficiency above his recent baseline. While his offensive execution was crisp, sluggish pick-and-roll coverage (+0.6 Def) allowed opponents to claw back much of the value he generated.

Shooting
FG 4/8 (50.0%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 62.5%
USG% 13.6%
Net Rtg +7.8
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.5m
Scoring +6.9
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +2.6
Hustle +3.8
Defense -3.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 41.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Pat Spencer 24.0m
16
pts
4
reb
4
ast
Impact
+10.8

Executed brilliantly within the flow of the offense, taking advantage of defensive lapses to generate high-quality looks. His surging impact score was anchored by smart positional defense (+4.4 Def) and a knack for securing loose balls (+3.5 Hustle) to extend possessions.

Shooting
FG 5/8 (62.5%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 82.0%
USG% 20.7%
Net Rtg +32.9
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.0m
Scoring +13.6
Creation +1.8
Shot Making +3.5
Hustle +3.1
Defense +2.1
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
14
pts
1
reb
3
ast
Impact
+8.3

Broke out of a recent shooting funk by attacking the interior instead of settling for perimeter looks. His two-way energy was the catalyst for his high rating, combining aggressive point-of-attack defense (+3.9 Def) with constant motion off the ball (+4.4 Hustle).

Shooting
FG 5/11 (45.5%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 54.9%
USG% 28.0%
Net Rtg -11.9
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.1m
Scoring +10.3
Creation +1.2
Shot Making +2.3
Hustle +0.3
Defense +3.1
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 53.3%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 1
9
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
-4.8

Forced too many contested looks in the half-court, leading to inefficient scoring that stalled offensive momentum. A distinct lack of secondary effort plays (+0.2 Hustle) compounded the damage from his missed shots, resulting in a heavily negative overall footprint.

Shooting
FG 4/12 (33.3%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 34.9%
USG% 34.8%
Net Rtg -41.9
+/- -18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.1m
Scoring +2.1
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +1.8
Hustle +5.7
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
Seth Curry 14.2m
0
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-8.0

Completely vanished from the offensive game plan, failing to register a single basket after a highly efficient previous outing. Without his floor-spacing gravity to bend the defense, his minutes became a noticeable drag on the team's overall offensive rating.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 6.5%
Net Rtg +26.7
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.2m
Scoring -1.3
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.5
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
Gui Santos 11.7m
4
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-7.6

A sudden disappearance of offensive volume snapped his streak of highly efficient scoring performances. Compounding the quiet offensive night was a tendency to get lost on defensive switches (-1.5 Def), which allowed opponents to exploit his side of the floor.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 14.8%
Net Rtg +68.2
+/- +15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.7m
Scoring +2.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.7
Hustle +0.3
Defense -2.2
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-7.0

Relegated to extreme situational duty, preventing any meaningful offensive contribution or rhythm. He did manage to flash some solid rim deterrence (+3.0 Def) in his brief window, keeping his net impact hovering right around neutral.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 18.2%
Net Rtg -12.2
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.1m
Scoring -1.9
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense +2.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-8.9

Barely broke a sweat during a fleeting rotational cameo that offered no time to establish rhythm. The complete lack of offensive involvement erased his usually highly efficient scoring baseline, leaving a negligible dent in the game's outcome.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg -50.0
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.4m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0